logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2020.01.09 2019두50014
의사면허자격정지처분취소
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Daejeon High Court.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Case summary and key issue

A. The reasoning of the lower judgment reveals the following circumstances.

(1) On February 14, 2013, the Plaintiff, who was a doctor, instructed the assistant nurse E by telephone without a hospital operated by himself, to issue a prescription to three persons, F, etc., and accordingly, E issued a prescription.

(hereinafter “instant violation”). E received an investigation into the instant violation, and stated that “three persons, such as F, were sent to the Plaintiff by phone, and received the Plaintiff’s instructions to provide the same prescription as that prior to the Plaintiff, and accordingly, he/she took the character of the subject patient on the Plaintiff’s computer, and then issued a prescription to the patient by printing out the prescription at the same time.”

(2) The Plaintiff was found to have violated Article 17(1) of the former Medical Service Act (amended by Act No. 11748, Apr. 5, 2013; hereinafter “former Medical Service Act”), and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of a fine of KRW 2 million (Cheongju District Court Decision 2016Ma870, Dec. 2, 2016). The judgment became final and conclusive as it is.

(3) On January 10, 2017, the Defendant issued the instant disposition ordering two months and ten days of qualification suspension of a medical doctor’s license on the ground that “the instant offense was committed by a non-medical practitioner E, not a medical practitioner, and thus constitutes a violation of Article 27(1) of the former Medical Service Act.”

B. The key issue of the instant case is whether the instant violation constitutes a violation of Article 27(1) of the former Medical Service Act.

2. Relevant provisions and legal principles

A. The main text of Article 17(1) of the former Medical Service Act provides that a medical doctor, dentist, or herb doctor, other than a doctor, dentist, or herb doctor, who directly conducted a medical examination or examined examination, shall not issue or dispatch a medical certificate, autopsy certificate, or prescription to the patient.

This is.

arrow